From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: Tuxera test suite failure for setfacl Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 21:08:01 +0100 Message-ID: <20140205200801.GA31318@quack.suse.cz> References: <87mwi69jas.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kara , ext4 development To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:58688 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755333AbaBEUIE (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Feb 2014 15:08:04 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87mwi69jas.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello, On Wed 05-02-14 11:45:39, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > With commit c6ac12a6159c802ae8b757dd13563564e64333df we are modifying > the ctime of the file when changing file's permission by setfacl. The > commit says that is correct as per spec. But we do have a test in tuxera > http://tuxera.com/sw/qa/pjd-fstest-20090130-RC.tgz test/xacl/00.t 45 > which expect the ctime to be not changed across setfacl. > > I haven't looked at the spec myself. Can you double check and make sure > it is ok to change the ctime across setfacl ? Well, it would be really strange if changing permissions via chmod(1) changed ctime but via setfacl(1) did not, don't you think? Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR